quote:
When Microsoft created the redirect, however, the company had to move to a new frontline of defense, so it used long-time partner Akamai, which runs a caching service that uses Linux.
this says that microsoft used linux to up their security, end of story. whether microsoft own the linux machines or not is not part of the question. they hid behind them because windows is not as secure as linux. that much is obvious, the rest is moot.
as for paragraph 8, it's moronic and reactionary, in the way which many people are simply because they want the support of the sheeple and they think the way to get it is to opt for the status quo.
paragraph 9 is fairly spot on, however it is also a bit paranoid and it criticises what i feel is a very small and irrelevant part of the article in question. the point is, if he wants an XP/fisher price GUI for turning ports on and off, such a thing probably exists (in fact doesn't gnome-lokkit do this?) and with open source software, somebody could just write one if they felt there was a demand for it. this is not the uphill battle in linux that it will be to "rally round" and fix windows, though why anybody should rally round to fix a closed source system for a closed minded company with no intentions of giving anything back to their users is beyond me.
